Civil Disputes in Vietnamese Courts 2026: 3 Critical Legal Updates You Need to Know

30-05-26 MTParners

From the jurisdiction of regional-level courts to digital enforcement — how is Vietnam’s civil justice system changing in 2026?

Since 1 July 2025, Vietnam’s court system has formally operated under a three-tier model in which Regional People’s Courts handle first-instance adjudication of almost all civil, family, and commercial disputes. Building on that structural reform, Official Dispatch No. 250/TANDTC-PC dated 28 April 2026 from the Supreme People’s Court has just provided practical guidance on 18 civil-litigation issues, while Decree No. 152/2026/ND-CP dated 13 May 2026 is ushering civil judgment enforcement into the digital age. Together, these three legal developments reshape the entire litigation journey for anyone currently involved — or about to be involved — in a civil lawsuit in Vietnam.

I. Regional People’s Courts — A Landmark Shift in Jurisdiction from 1 July 2025

Law No. 85/2025/QH15 (amending the Civil Procedure Code), effective 1 July 2025, abolished district-level courts and elevated the Regional People’s Court as the sole first-instance court at the local level — the most significant judicial restructuring in two decades.

Regional People’s Courts now have first-instance jurisdiction over all disputes and petitions listed in Articles 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, and 33 of the Civil Procedure Code 2015, including civil disputes, family matters, commercial and business disputes, and labour disputes — even those previously reserved for provincial courts (e.g., disputes involving foreign parties, intellectual property disputes, collective labour disputes).

Key points for litigants filing a lawsuit:

File at the Regional People’s Court with territorial jurisdiction over the defendant’s place of residence or work, or where the disputed real estate is located (general rule under Article 39 CPC).
Disputes with foreign elements: still filed at the Regional People’s Court, except petitions to annul or recognise arbitral awards — those fall under the exclusive jurisdiction of the People’s Courts of Hanoi, Da Nang, or Ho Chi Minh City.
Court fees and filing fees remain unchanged — governed by Resolution No. 326/2016/UBTVQH14 and subsequent amendments.

The regional court model has been rolled out across 34 provinces and cities, including all 19 regional courts in Ho Chi Minh City. Litigants must verify the territorial area covered by each regional court before filing to avoid having their case returned for lack of jurisdiction.

II. Official Dispatch 250/TANDTC-PC: The Supreme Court Addresses the 18 Hottest Civil Issues

On 28 April 2026, the Supreme People’s Court issued Official Dispatch No. 250/TANDTC-PC — the outcome of a video-conference on 1 April 2026 at which the Judicial Council answered 51 practical questions from lower courts, including 18 on civil, civil-procedure, and commercial matters. While not a legislative instrument, this Dispatch carries significant weight as practical guidance for the judiciary.

Six of the most noteworthy clarifications:

Company without a legal representative: The court must NOT automatically suspend the case merely because the company temporarily lacks a legal representative. Instead, it must examine the company charter, governance structure, and actual management practice to identify the party authorised to participate in the proceedings.
Expired term, no successor: Where a representative’s term has expired but no replacement has been appointed, the court may still recognise that person as the de facto representative based on their actual management role.
Disputes over enforcement of security interests (bank — tenanted real estate): The court must take a holistic view of the credit agreement, mortgage contract, and the rights and interests of the tenant and third parties.
Scope of appellate review: An appellate court must confine its review to the grounds of appeal. Procedural deficiencies at first instance are not automatically grounds for annulling the judgment.
Inheritance disputes — standing to sue: Courts are encouraged to request that parties supplement evidence and documents before refusing to accept the case, rather than rejecting it outright.
Repayment of loans in equivalent value: Where the original asset can no longer be returned in kind, the court may order repayment in money or other assets pursuant to Article 466 of the Civil Code 2015.

These guidelines reflect a growing trend: substantive legal reality and actual transactional practice are prioritised over purely formalistic approaches. This places greater demands on litigants to prepare comprehensive evidentiary files from the very first instance.

III. Decree 152/2026/ND-CP: Civil Judgment Enforcement Enters the Digital Era

On 13 May 2026, the Government issued Decree No. 152/2026/ND-CP implementing the Law on Civil Judgment Enforcement — marking a major digital transformation in the execution of civil judgments. This is the most recent implementing decree, introducing several unprecedented mechanisms.

Key innovations under Decree 152:

Comprehensive digitalisation: Online filing of enforcement requests, electronic notifications via VNeID, and the operation of an interconnected electronic enforcement database. Notifications through VNeID are prioritised and carry the same legal validity as in-person service.
Enhanced asset verification powers: Enforcement agencies gain access to interconnected databases to verify bank accounts, real estate, and other assets of judgment debtors — significantly reducing the risk of asset concealment and dissipation.
Force majeure and extension of limitation periods: The Decree clarifies circumstances under which the deadline to request enforcement may be extended, including natural disasters, serious illness, corporate restructuring, and inability to receive the judgment due to procedural obstacles.
Right to negotiate enforcement terms: Parties may still agree on the manner and content of enforcement, provided they do not violate mandatory legal provisions or prejudice the rights of third parties.

Importantly, from the date the Decree takes effect, notifications issued via VNeID are legally valid. Judgment debtors should regularly check their VNeID application for enforcement notifications to avoid missing critical legal deadlines.

IV. Practical Impact — What Changes for Litigants in 2026?

These three reforms combined create a civil litigation journey that looks quite different from anything before 2025. At the filing stage, plaintiffs submit their claim to the Regional People’s Court instead of the district court — the correct filing address must be re-verified. During trial, Dispatch 250 signals that courts will be more proactive in asking parties to supplement evidence, particularly in inheritance disputes and cases involving corporate parties. At the enforcement stage — traditionally seen as the bottleneck of the entire process — Decree 152 arms enforcement agencies with better asset-verification tools and digitises notification channels to accelerate the fulfilment of obligations.

For corporate litigants, two points deserve particular attention: first, internal governance records (charter, appointment minutes, power of attorney) must be up to date and unambiguous so the court can identify a valid representative; second, security arrangements involving real estate currently leased to third parties should be carefully reviewed before any dispute arises, to pre-empt the risk of enforcement rights being restricted due to the tenant’s legitimate interests.

V. Recommendations

For individuals:

Identify the correct Regional People’s Court with territorial jurisdiction before filing — avoid wasting time on a wrong venue submission.
Prepare comprehensive evidence from the outset, as the scope of appellate review is limited to the grounds stated in the appeal.
Keep VNeID information up to date to receive enforcement notifications electronically and on time.

For businesses:

Review and update representation authority records: company charter, appointment minutes, internal delegation policy.
Audit security agreements involving assets used by third parties — clearly define the scope and conditions for enforcing the security in the contract.
Monitor further guidance from the Supreme People’s Court, as Dispatch 250 is not the final word — many issues are still awaiting formalisation into an official guiding resolution.

MT & Partners Law Firm, with a team of experienced lawyers specialising in civil and commercial litigation who stay constantly up to date with the latest legal developments, is ready to assist clients from the initial legal advisory stage, through the preparation of litigation files and courtroom representation, to monitoring judgment enforcement. Contact our hotline 0987140772 or email info@mtpartners.vn for a consultation.

(*) This article is for general reference only and does not constitute specific legal advice. For guidance tailored to your particular circumstances, please contact a qualified lawyer directly.